Just shows how out of touch the urbanites were with what is happening in the rest of the country. What's worse, the disconnect has gotten even worse.
Thank goodness for the electoral college system. If there was ever a need for a system that prevents us from becoming a Hunger Games society, with a few capital cities deciding how all of the people in the various districts should live, it is now. The Founding Fathers brilliantly understood the need for a mechanism to preserve a level of state autonomy and 30 states made it clear where they stood.
Really have to spell it out for you @TD? Trump has the worst opinion polls in modern history. A white nationalist (Gillespie) got defeated in Virginia, in what looks like a referendum on Trump's policy and character.
Virginia is 2/1 Democrat because of all the federal bureaucrats near DC. Gillespie is an old, elite RINO. The lesson learned is that Blue States are going to vote Blue. The list of Blue States is shorter than it was 1 year ago. Goodbye Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
There are 8 Democratic senators running for re-election in 2018 in States that Trump won. After that election, and the possibility of 60 Republican senators and 6 conservative Supreme Court Justices, Democrats may want to adopt the motto “ Yeah, but we won New Jersey and Virginia”.
"Jack,and your point is?"
The current administration is not a Republican paradise. In fact, Trump not only struggles to work effectively with a Republican-majority Congress, but also with his own Cabinet.
The voters don't appreciate churn within government in the same way that fans appreciate drama in reality TV. In particular, Trump's support amongst moderates in both parties is slipping, and that's who put him in office.
I suspect that the next major elections will see an erosion of support for Republicans in Congress. And they don't have a commanding mandate as it is.
Wow blue state like New Jersey voted Democrat. Mighty impressive lol. Virginia hasn't been a Republican state for over 20 years, so I am guessing current events pass some people by. Ish - I don't think either party when they win gets an actual mandate. If voters were honest they'd admit they no longer vote for anyone, just against.
But it was twenty years ago today that Sgt. Pepper taught the band to play (probably closer to 40 now)
The results of one year ago will soon be relagated to the ash heap of history.
"Virginia hasn't been a Republican state for over 20 years"
---------------------
But the Democrats captured most of the rich, suburban, areas that used to be solidly Red. Keep your head up your ass, @SkiBum.
"I don't think either party when they win gets an actual mandate. If voters were honest they'd admit they no longer vote for anyone, just against."
That may be true for certain blocks of voters. What I mean by a mandate is a majority that allows the Republicans (or Democrats) to carry forward their agenda.
Currently, the Republicans can only afford two defectors in the Senate. They have a more commanding majority in the House, but they also suffer from greater inter-party acrimony. This is particularly true with the Freedom Caucus creating more problems than solutions for the Republicans.
So, on paper they have a majority. In practice they lack a decisive mandate.
The Republican turnout in Virginia was lower than for Trump. Gillespie failed to bring out the base. Trump voters stayed home because they knew Gillespie wasn’t with them.
If Republicans want to win in 2018, they will embrace Trump policies on taxes, immigration, and draining the swamp. While Trump may be unpopular, his policies are still popular.
What Trump has accomplished is monumental, noteworthy, and admirable. It is the partisan congress and sadly, partisan, activist courts that have blocked further necessary reforms to make America great again.
"monumental, noteworthy, and admirable. "
--------------------
Typical post from @GammaNut: 11 syllables with no specific content. You could replace all 11 syllables with "good" and it would carry the same meaning.
@GammaNut is that annoying guy in the front row who's always raising his hand during class. He's secretly reading his thesaurus so he can sound as smart as possible, but everyone's shaking their head and laughing behind his back.
These elections don't mean nearly as much as the dems want to believe. And the results of all the special elections this year don't mean nearly as much as the Republicans want to believe.
The reality is that Chris Christie is deeply unpopular in a state where the other party makes up the majority, so naturally the voters weren't going to elect his lieutenant governor to succeed him. And Virginia is a purple swing state that always seems to choose a governor of the opposite party from a first-term president. They'll probably choose a republican governor in 4 years. So none of these elections matter all that much.
Yes, it matters that Virginia used to be red but now is bluish purple. But West Virginia used to be blue and now it's solid red. Missouri used to be purple and now is red, etc. Demographics change over time. Not every story is automatically bad news for the GOP. And trump can still save face because Kim Guadagno never endorsed him, and Ed Gillespie was not sincere in his embrace of Trumpism. They both campaigned like Trump but they still distanced themselves from him.
So if these elections don't matter, then what does? Public sentiment, voter psychology, and approval ratings. I remember, years ago, when the word 'Liberal' became a dirty word and every liberal wanted to pretend that they were something else by never using that word in public. Now the same thing seems to be happening to the words 'republican' and 'conservative.' People seem to want to call themselves anything else, out of embarrassment or political strategy. Witness how many people now want to call themselves 'libertarian' or 'alt-right' or 'nationalist' or 'independent-conservative.' To make matters worse, the label 'republican' has become a bad word even in some republican-leaning places!
For example, my town historically leans very republican and voted overwhelmingly for trump last year. But this year the democrats started specifically referring to the incumbent officeholders as republicans in their campaign literature, like it was a slur, and the democrats won!
So my predictions are:
1) The republicans will lose the House majority next year *even if* they pass tax reform, regardless of economic performance.
2) Republicans will keep control of the Senate but will not win many extra seats, despite the best map they've seen in a while. They will lose a few incumbents and so will the dems, so it will be a wash.
3) Trump will eventually call the Republicans 'losers,' begin to distance himself from them and claim that he was never really with them. He will begin to revert back to the moderate democrat that he really is. So we need to get all the fiscally conservative stuff done NOW while we still have time.
Special prosecutor Robert Mueller has gotten one guilty plea from the Trump team and has obtained two indictments, including Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort. Some of these sleazy customers will squeal to save themselves, and Trump will be flushed down the tube.
Trump is already waging war on the never-Trumpers in the GOP. Look at the number of GOP Senators and Congressmen who are “ retiring “. Lots of moving pieces.
All roads in the Mueller investigation keep pointing at Fusion GPS. The latest revelation is the Russian Lawyer who met with Manafort is tied to Fusion. Also, it appears Fusion was paying “ journalists” to run anti-Trump stories.
Hillary and the Dems funded Fusion GPS. None of the charges against Manafort have anything to do with Trump or his campaign.
@mark94, no, Steve Bannon is waging war on the never-trumpers while Trump himself was endorsing Luther Strange. And some of the people who are retiring weren't never-trumpers to begin with. My bet is that many of the retirees will ultimately be replaced with democrats next year.
@tumblingdice, good point but remember, in 1982, 1986, 1994, 2006, 2010, and 2014 the stock market had gone up and yet voters still punished the party of the sitting president during the midterms.
There are many establishment politicians that are losing their primaries because they are unwilling to make the changes to the swamp and are therefore part of the problem.
Dickless Lugar in Indiana found out the hard way when he betrayed the people of Indiana. He thought he was invulnerable because a dofuss
As far as the stock market, cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% to 20% will definitely help CEOs and share holders (probably blow a hole in the deficit/debt, too). But a lot that is already priced into the market and P/Es are very high. If the tax bill doesn't go through I would think it would set off a big selloff in stocks.
ran against him. The party thought that the voters would stick with the lying sack of shit Lugar but he lost the primary big time. The dofuss would have won his seat but he stepped in it when he answered a loaded question directly.
Flake announced his retirement when he found out he was 32 points behind in the primary polls because he was fighting to keep the corruption in DC going, voting for more taxes, more welfare, gun control, --- everything he said he was against until he got seduced by the evil in DC.
While the Donald may not be everyone's cup of tea I would much rather have him than that murderous cunt hillary.
Two Words: TERM LIMITS
Keep it simple: an amendment stating ALL government spending may not exceed 30% of the GDP, all taxes(fed, state, local-income, sales, property, excise etc) added together may not exceed the budget. If a budget is passed exceeding the tax revenues NOTE: all government employees will be held responsible, Elected officials and their staff will have all pay and expense accounts suspended and mandatory permanent discharge of civilian government employees shall immediate occur until the shortfall is met.
@Tiredtraveler,
Excuse me, but when exactly did Jeff Flake vote for more corruption, taxes, or welfare? And he said he was 'open' to the idea of background checks in theory, but when did he vote for gun control? Did I miss something? OTOH, Donald Trump came out in favor of banning bump-stocks. So why don't you blame him instead?
Jeff Flake has been a tireless campaigner against earmarks and excessive spending since the day he arrived in congress. He's a true believer. The guy ran the Goldwater Institute!
And I'd love a balanced budget amendment or a federal tax cap. But in order to accomplish what you want we would have to scale back or end Social Security and Medicare. I would like that very much, but unfortunately your boy Donald Trump specifically said NO to any entitlement reform. So is it ok if we all just live in reality for a change?
There were 2 issues with Flake: immigration and anti-Trump demagoguery. He was perfectly aligned with his Mormon base. However, that was enough to make him unpopular in Arizona outside Mormons.
But in order to accomplish what you want we would have to scale back or end Social Security and Medicare. I would like that very much, but unfortunately your boy Donald Trump specifically said NO...
-----
Since when has Trump kept to his word? He only cares about his ego and "winning." Who knows, maybe your dreams of a balanced budget will come true.
Ah....this will be my last post here. Good article about tax cuts and economic growth. Makes fun of @Mark93's hero Art Laffer:
(NY Times article and you may need Chrome incognito mode to read)
[view link]
@mark94,
What does that have to do with Tiredtraveler's assertion that Flake had voted for more corruption, taxes, welfare, and gun control? Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean that every bad claim about them is true.
Grand1511: Maybe, but 51% approve of his policies. So far, he has delivered, or tried his best to deliver, on his promises. As long as he does that, he will keep his 30% base, plus draw enough other support to win. Candidates who embrace his policies will also win.
@mark94,
If that's what you meant then you're absolutely right. As several talking heads have already said, there was just no constituency available for Flake. He was offering fiscal conservatism together with support for free trade, immigration reform, and also a desire for civility in public discourse. That's just not where the GOP base is anymore. Plus he never endorsed Trump, even though he has voted in lockstep with the GOP Senate caucus so far this year.
Honestly, up until his speech, his criticism of Trump had been pretty muted, unlike Trump's many primary opponents who bashed Trump for months and yet somehow ended up as his best friends. Trump forgave Rick Perry, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, etc., but he never forgave Jeff Flake. The endorsement thing really seemed to piss Trump off.
I believe Flake would have lost the general election anyway even if he could somehow have made it through the primary. Now I'm just hoping that Kelli Ward can win next year. She's pretty good on lots of issues.
Congresswoman, and fighter pilot, Martha McSally has announced she is running. She is a vastly better candidate than Kelli Ward. She also has a 100% record voting with Trump. We’ll see how Bannon reacts.
Trump isn’t the problem for Republicans, it’s a do nothing Congress. A good summary from IBD:
Unlike Congress, Trump has delivered as much as possible on his biggest promises. He put a solid conservative on the Supreme Court, performed a record regulatory rollback at the federal level, pulled the U.S. out of the costly Paris Climate Agreement, pushed Congress to reform our absurd tax code, and used his executive power to curb some of ObamaCare's worst excesses.
Oh, yes, and after eight years of excuses by the previous White House tenant, Trump has ISIS on the ropes, nearly completely defeated and no longer holding significant amounts of territory. He's also facing down the North Korean and Iranian nuclear threats, two big cans that both Republican and Democratic presidents have kicked down the road for decades. And Trump has done this all in a year.
Meanwhile, congressional Republicans have been a disappointment. They've promised to get rid of ObamaCare and to reform taxes. While those should be slam dunks, they've so far failed to do either, although tax reform of some sort now seems highly likely.
The implied argument of the Republicans has been, "Wait until the 2018 election is over; then we'll really be freed up to do great things." Well, guess what. If Tuesday's any guide, 2018 might not keep Republicans in power. The Democrats look like they're getting their electoral mojo back. For Republicans, it's time to be bold or go home.
@mark94,
Why is Martha McSally a better candidate? Because you think she can win? If so I don't get it, I thought the whole point of the Trump/Bannon movement was to ignore electoral math and vote for whoever shakes his or her fist at the establishment. Otherwise you might as well have voted for Marco Rubio in the primary last year, right? Besides, Bannon also said that the candidates who can allegedly 'win' aren't real winners. John McCain, Bob Dole, and Mitt Romney were all chosen partly because they could allegedly win the general election, and yet they all lost. By comparison, everyone (including me) said that Donald Trump could never win and yet he did. What does that tell you?
We're also apparently being told that a military record isn't relevant anymore. John McCain and Bob Dole were war heroes. (I mean, you know... McCain was captured and whatnot, but... .) Donald Trump was, of course, an obvious draft dodger who literally said (I swear, you can't make this shit up) that avoiding STDs in New York City during the 60s and 70s was his own personal Vietnam. Almost makes Bill Clinton's dodging the draft seem dignified by comparison, eh? ;) So, ok, Martha McSally was the first American female combat pilot and that's cool. But why should it matter? Trump won with no military experience whatsoever.
Or maybe it's because McSally has more political experience. She holds a higher office than Kelli Ward, after all. Well, if that's the explanation, don't make me laugh! I was told last year that all the candidates I supported were "career establishment politicians" unlike Donald Trump, who had never held elective office before. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Scott Walker were all part of the dreaded 'establishment,' but Trump wasn't (despite being a long-time well-connected political insider whose daughter plays Candy Crush with Chelsea Clinton). So why should McSally's political experience matter now?
Or maybe it's because Kelli Ward has a history of saying bad things. McSally is so polished, but Kelli Ward has said that John McCain should step down and hand his seat to her because he has cancer. And Ward also did hold a town hall meeting to address a crazy conspiracy theory (which she REFUTED and said that she doesn't believe in, but whatever, sound bites are all that matter, right?). So okay, Ward says crazy stuff and she's insensitive. But so what? The internet doesn't have enough bandwidth for me to list all the crazy and rude shit that Donald Trump has said just in the past two years alone. It didn't matter for him. You guys all lined up and voted for him anyway. You said it was striking a blow against political correctness. So why should it matter now for Kelli Ward?
Listen, Martha McSally IS the establishment and Mitch McConnell will go all-in for her in a primary match. She would be more cozy with McConnell than Jeff Flake ever was, because Flake habitually released annual lists of earmarks to embarrass congressional appropriators (which probably pissed McConnell off because appropriations equal power in DC). So why do you prefer Martha McSally? Or why do you think she's a better candidate? Please tell me that you're not going to waste your vote on Martha McSally after telling me that Jeff Flake is the establishment.
Here’s my impression as an Arizona voter.
I view Kelli Ward as a little nutty and just as opportunistic and ambitious as any incumbent. She has embraced Trump but I think she has done that because it’s the smart move, not because of any deep philosophical position.
Martha McSally presents as a stable candidate who is far more electable. Her voting record indicates she is aligned with Trump’s position, even if she has kept some distance from him personally.
I think McSally would win. I think Ward would lose. I trust McSally to vote the right way most of the time.
@mark94,
So you would take Donald Trump and Martha McSally over Jeff Flake AND Kelli Ward? Tell me again, how exactly are you a libertarian? LOL.
Jeff Flake is a stable candidate too. And his voting record aligns with Trump but you guys hate his guts anyway. I give up. I guess all that shit I wrote was meaningless. People just like what they like and ideology goes out the window when they step into a voting booth.
55 comments